Talk:Tūheitia

Parts of the following news article seem to be copied from this Wikipedia article and care should be taken if citing it: "Māori King Tūheitia’s death: The Māori who didn’t want to be king but became a man for his people". The New Zealand Herald. 30 August 2024.

Korotangi Paki court case 2014

An editor has attempted to take out most of the actual facts around the king's son's court case with an abbreviated version that is quite and perhaps deliberately misleading. Specifically it leaves out the facts that Korotangi admitted that he was GUILTY to all 4 charges. In addition it left out that reason why he was not actually convicted ie he is the son of a king. It left out the punishment he received. Further it leaves out the after shock of the revelation of the extent of Korotangi's anti social attitudes displayed on the teen's own social media. One of the newspaper articles removed by the editor emphasizes the crisis the son's actions have had on the king. Claudia

This is an article on the father. Hugely in-depth coverage of his teenage son being a teenager is not really appropriate. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:28, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

I am not asking for huge, in depth coverage -just accurate portrayal of the basic facts. Korotangi is not just "being a teenager"-he is being a criminal!! Your statement is just utter nonsense.I probably know well at least 100 young men of that age and none have been involved in crime. Most teens are law abiding! Details of his previous court case have been in the article for years. This latest spate of law breaking is far more serious both for him and his father. To say nothing of Korotangi's social media impact which has been far worse in Tainui. It is not unusual for young men to go the jail for the string of offences he has committed. It has now led to the highly unusual event of the crown challenging the judge's decision not to convict. In view of the king's bad health 1 of the sons may be king sooner rather than later. It is notable that the king has not carried out any, or many, official duties for several years now. Claudia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.62.226.243 (talk) 06:30, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Reretewhioi Poukai (2018).jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:06, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

A major contributor to the article, ArchdeaconNgira, noted in an edit summary that they are an "official of the King's office". I think the article may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies. Nurg (talk) 09:37, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• King Tuheitia meets Pope Francis.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:35, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Main Page ITN

Could this be featured of the Main Page's In The News section? Bajaria (talk) 21:33, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

For his death? I've proposed that and I think it's going to happen. Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates#August 30 Dhantegge (talk) 07:58, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Move suggestion

Should we rename this page Tuheitia? "Tuheitia Paki" was his birth name but he is almost exclusively referred to in the news as "Tūheitia", as well as by the Kingitanga themselves

Some news articles that call him Tuheitia (some include the prefix "Kiingi" but that isn't conventional, except for Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother) -

Māori King Kiingi Tuheitia's tangi: Updates, day four - RNZ

In photos: Māori King Kiingi Tuheitia's 18-year reign - RNZ

New Zealand’s Māori King Tuheitia dies aged 69 - The Guardian

New Zealand's Māori King Tuheitia dies - BBC News

New Zealand’s Maori King Tuheitia dies aged 69 - Al Jazeera

Dhantegge (talk) 07:19, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Also very important - "Tuheitia" does not have a macron. This page is incorrect in that regard. Dhantegge (talk) 10:13, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

What is your basis for saying that the 'u' does not have a macron? Is it based on written sources, or based on pronunciation, or both? Please elaborate. Nurg (talk) 06:25, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I haven't had a proper look, but it does appear to me that it is macronless. Sources appear to be inconsistent. Sometimes they use a macron, sometimes they don't.

• Live: Māori King Kiingi Tuheitia's tangi: Government ministers pay their respects
• Hipkins pays tribute to Kīngi Tuheitia, 'the king of kotahitanga'
• Kīngi Tuheitia: Proceedings confirmed for tomorrow's funeral, Te Whakawahinga
• Kīngi Tūheitia tangi live updates: NZ politicians pay their respects
• Live: Political leaders arrive at Tūrangawaewae Marae for Kīngi Tūheitia's tangi

―Panamitsu (talk) 06:42, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

But then the dictionary includes a macron so something strange that I don't understand going on. ―Panamitsu (talk) 06:47, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

oh sorry i moved and then remember to check talk, someone can undo if they want TheLoyalOrder (talk) 08:07, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, let's keep it as Tūheitia for now, as you have moved it. That's the main issue - @TheLoyalOrder if you could also move "Death of Tūheitia Paki" to "Death of Tūheitia" that would be good.

In my opinion, the only spelling that is valid is that of the Kiingitanga themselves, and they do not use a macron. When Tuheitia spoke in January he appeared before a lectern that said "Kiingi Tuheitia". Plus the Waikato Tainui website uses the same spelling. Dhantegge (talk) 08:12, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Dropping 'Paki' from the title seems like the right thing, so I don't intend to undo it. (The matter of the macron requires more discussion.) Nurg (talk) 08:51, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Nurg kia ora. There is only one source in which there is a macron, and that is Te Aka Māori Dictionary. I agree that this is weird, in that Te Aka would in any case be a reliable source. What concerns me is circular reporting getting the king's name wrong by merely looking at the Wikipedia page... Dhantegge (talk) 08:15, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

It is plain wrong that there is only one source in which there is a macron. There are numerous sources that use 'Tūheitia', numerous sources that use 'Tuuheitia', and numerous sources that use 'Tuheitia'. The primary consideration in resolving this is how it is pronounced. If it is pronounced with a short 'u', we should remove the macron. If it is pronounced with a long 'u', we should keep the macron. Nurg (talk) 03:11, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Stuff uses a macron: [1] in fact, the only doubled vowel in the list of Māori monarchs in that article is Te Atairangikaahu. I suggest everyone wait until someone from Waikato-Tainui comments here to explain why this apparent inconsistency, before adding or removing any macrons. Daveosaurus (talk) 05:16, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

What? That's a ridiculous suggestion. Traumnovelle (talk) 08:04, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Well pardon me for suggesting that maybe you should get your facts straight before monkeying around with the spelling of people's names. Daveosaurus (talk) 21:28, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Kīngi vs Kiingi

Shouldn’t we be somewhat more deliberate about our orthography? That is: double-vowelling vs the macrons, especially in Kiingi. I understand on English language articles we don’t need a complete standardisation of one orthography over the other when words are coming from another language, as many words get to English from different times and places, but shouldn’t we at least use the same spelling of Kiingi throughout? And should that spelling not be the one used by Tainui? — HTGS (talk) 00:08, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

My 2 cents: I do think that, generally, on topics particularly relevant to Waikato-Tainui we should be using their choice of orthography for Māori words. Though, as noted in some of the discussions above, it seems they are not always consistent. I would make an exception for words which are commonly used and have an established spelling in NZ English, e.g. I probably wouldn't use Maaori in place of Māori/Maori unless it was a direct quote.-161.29.216.215 (talk) 02:15, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

We should indeed use the same spelling thoughout. MOS:COMMONALITY says "When more than one variant spelling exists within a national variety of English, the most commonly used current variant should usually be preferred, except where the less common spelling has a specific usage in a specialized context". That means to me that we should use macrons, and for this example, "kīngi"/"Kīngi". The exception for "specific usage in a specialized context" would include the formal proper names of organisations and similar, such as the Kiingi Tuheitia Portraiture Award. But I don't think the exception should extend to the names of kings – we should stick with Kīngi Tūheitia, Kīngi Tāwhiao etc. Nurg (talk) 04:36, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

I’m realising now that if this discussion goes any further, it should probably migrate to Talk:Māori King movement if a more global preference is desired. On that question, I note that modern usage in news sources is highly mixed and, without some analysis, I don’t see a preferred variant, and so I would prefer to use the Kiingitanga’s preferred spelling (←).

For here and now though, would everyone be happy enough to agree that at least the words Kīngitanga and Kīngi should agree and be consistent orthographically throughout this article? Note that most mentions use the macron at the moment, but within the same paragraph of the Family section, we have “Te Kaunihera a te Kiingi” and “Te Whirinaki a te Kīngi”, so for mere consistency we would change Kiingi to Kīngi there. It may or may not be worth noting that in 2013, sources that mentioned those two phrases either used kiingi, or kingi, with no macrons. And there’s also one other “Kiingitanga” in a footnote to be changed, but that seems uncontroversial. — HTGS (talk) 02:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I agree 👍.-161.29.216.215 (talk) 09:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Merge proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

The Death of Tūheitia article should be merged here. There is not enough secondary coverage for a standalone article and it gives undue weight to his death over the rest of his life to have a stand alone article. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:56, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Disagree There are more than enough secondary sources to justify a standalone death article. I suggest that the death article is so detailed that merging it in its entirety into the bio would make the death part undue. Schwede66 17:42, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Of the sources the majority are primary, a few are unreliable (live updates), and anything that could be considered secondary is about the succession and history rather than the death.

Obviously the article wouldn't be merged in the entirety, most of the article are quoted statements, which would be summarised instead. Traumnovelle (talk) 19:16, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Merge. I disagree that there is a lack of secondary coverage, but the event of his death does not need to be separated out from the rest of his life and works. If we were solely concerned with preponderance of sources, we would have a Wikipedia article for every section of every article that now exists. Imagine not only an article on the death of every celebrity, but on every major period of their life.

The present state of the article definitely gives undue emphasis to the reactions to his death though. — HTGS (talk) 03:13, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Merge. The Tūheitia article has readable prose of approx 2,000 words, which is not big, and it can easily absorb the other article. The 'Reactions' section should be trimmed though - Helen Clark's tweet, for example, says nothing useful. Nurg (talk) 09:25, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

No merge. Since my comment of 15 Oct, the article has been substantially altered and expanded. It is currently tagged as needing further expansion. I'm not sure on the future for the article, but let's see how it further develops. Nurg (talk) 23:57, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

And now it goes against WP:RSPRIMARY where it states articles should be based primarily on secondary sources. Traumnovelle (talk) 03:53, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Disagree with deletion. The proposal to trim the reactions section is exactly why this article needs to be kept as it is, and expanded upon. Stripping it down to the bare minimum and putting it in Tuheitia's main page would be a waste of time and delete valuable work. As for Helen Clark's reaction, it follows pretty standard precedent to include quotes from leaders when a notable leader has died.

Arguments for keeping this page include WP:DEMOLISH, since I've previously said I would like to add more detail from his tangihanga - this page must be equally about the funeral, which follows precedent too. It was an enormous event, taking a week to complete, with numerous notable guest speakers from academics to iwi leaders to politicians (including the Prime Minister). It also would, in my opinion, serve a purpose in showing how Ngā Wai Hono i te Pō was elected. It would be WP:UNDUE to create an article about her coronation, but we could cover it here. I have been very busy in the last month, and have not edited it myself, but just because I haven't been and no one else has means we should delete the page. There is no deadline and is still ample room for improvement. I am concerned deletion would be WP:OVERZEALOUS. Dhantegge (talk) 23:27, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Merging is not deletion. The article history will remain and can be restored if more sourcing develops that would justify a standalone article. Traumnovelle (talk) 23:34, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

“It also would, in my opinion, serve a purpose in showing how Ngā Wai Hono i te Pō was elected.” I’m confused. Isn’t that what 2024 Kīngitanga election is for?

I am sympathetic to WP:DEMOLISH, but as always, the topic can always be expanded at the higher-scoped article, then split off if necessary later. And, honestly, I don’t think this is a real case of the house being mid-build, but do you have a clear (or hazy) plan for the article and how you would want to expand it, or see it expanded? — HTGS (talk) 02:20, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

As it stands, the article only recaps some of the events of the last two or three days of the tangi. I'd like to see a day-by-day account of it, with speakers listed. Detail on how it was broadcast would also be food. This was an event of national significance, and deleting / merging it just because I've been so busy is unfair and against Wikipedia policy. I will get around to it, and others have been helping to. You say we can "split off if necessary later" - I can't see the point of deleting all this work if I'm just going to keep working on it. Splitting it off later would mean recreating everything all over again - for most editors, at least, since I certainly won't have access to the archived version.

I take "merging" in this context as the same as deleting, unless the plan is to put the entire article into Tuheitia's page. Which it isn't, obviously, because that would be too long... hence the separate page. Dhantegge (talk) 08:25, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

We are supposed to provide a summary of things. Wikipedia is also based primarily on secondary sources, the majority of which will take sometime to be written and published.

>Splitting it off later would mean recreating everything all over again.

No it wouldn't, not only would the article history be preserved you can also split the content from the main article off if there is enough content/sourcing to justify a stand alone article. Nothing prevents you from working on a copy in draft space or user space either. Traumnovelle (talk) 08:43, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Oppose merge because the separate article seems to be more than justified based on the coverage in media. It was a pretty significant event in New Zealand. As others have said including all the information from this article into the biography would give undue weight to the death in that article. Keep them separate. David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 22:51, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

No one is suggesting to merge all the primary sourced superfluous details. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:07, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Very good points made. Deletion would be a clear violation of WP:DEMOLISH and WP:NOEFFORT. A given article, especially a newsworthy one like this, "shouldn't be deleted for its current status only because no one has improved it yet. Such deletion would prevent editors from improving it in the future. Conversely it's not enough to promise to make the article better; editors should explain how to do it." I've outlined clearly above as per HTGS' request what the article would ideally look like. You're right overall David that these articles should, for the sake of brevity, be kept separate. Dhantegge (talk) 08:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Just realised I wrote "food" instead of "good" but don't hold it against me Traumnovelle! Lol Dhantegge (talk) 08:42, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Those are essays, they are not policy nor guidelines and can be freely violated so long as policy is followed. Traumnovelle (talk) 18:53, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Do not merge. See Cloventt's comment above. This was a nationally significant event. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 00:47, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Do not merge. Nationally significant event that was reported upon internationally: https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/aug/30/maori-king-tuheitia-paki-dies-aged-69-death-new-zealand No objection to renaming "Tangi of Tuheitia" or similar it as most of the coverage was of the whole event. Daveosaurus (talk) 07:41, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.